The Warriors are so much better at moving the ball without Durant in the lineup

imagine complaining about having Durant on your team. what a luxury :oldlol:

[QUOTE=Vino24]imagine complaining about having Durant on your team. what a luxury :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

:roll: :roll:

Too true brotha

[QUOTE=Phoenix]The thing is the Warriors culture could motivate other quality players to join and keep the train moving another few years. Steph is 31. Dray and Klay are 29. You got guys like Iggy and Livingston who are aging and will need to be replaced, but there's a culture of excellence under current management which could prove very inviting for prospective free agents. KD leaving opens up a space for someone else, or somebodies else, to shore up the team.[/QUOTE]

yea theoretically dray would stop coasting if kd leaves but I could still see him chilling during the RS. Free agents can be hit or miss and they dont have much space but I guess I should see who they sign before making conclusions. I saw one article just now, it threw out names like Rudy, Ariza, Marcus Morris, and Danny Green for the mle. Not bad but nothing great and unlikely(most of these guys will ask for more than the mle for one). I've said it before I think 2020 is the year they go after someone after iggy and dray become fa's

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]The hell with petty agendas.

I'm a basketball fan. And the Dubs without Durant are fukking good. Be it w/ results, style or just plain entertainment.[/QUOTE]

They play to win. Not to be entertaining while being shutout for 5min in a game 7 finals :lol

Warriors need a player that they can CONSISTENTLY lean on when times get tough and the effectiveness of the "entertaining ball movement" runs dry.

They can win AND be entertaining. Not mutually exclusive.

[QUOTE=34-24 Footwork]They play to win. Not to be entertaining while being shutout for 5min in a game 7 finals :lol

Warriors need a player that they can CONSISTENTLY lean on when times get tough and the effectiveness of the "entertaining ball movement" runs dry.

They can win AND be entertaining. Not mutually exclusive.[/QUOTE]


And shown they can do both without Durant.

Thanks for proving my point, I guess? :confusedshrug:

[QUOTE=kuniva_dAMiGhTy]And shown they can do both without Durant.

Thanks for proving my point, I guess? :confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]
Rockets would of won last year and Cavs would of won the year before if it wasn't for Durant's iso game

[QUOTE=Vino24]Rockets would of won last year and Cavs would of won the year before if it wasn't for Durant's iso game[/QUOTE]

We don't actually know that.

And, again, it wasn't Durant or nobody. You people have to stop acting like they weren't going to upgrade from Barnes with another player or perhaps 2 other players to fill out the depth.

What we are seeing right now is not how the team would look if they didn't sign KD...it would be considerably improved from the team we are watching now.

You know, the team that just won a road elimination game against the Rockets, beat the Blazers in game 1 easily, and has won 29 of the last 30 without KD and with Steph.

Like, as I asked earlier, can we please just retire the "Warriors need Durant" to be elite narrative? It is over...they don't.

Does he make them better? Hell yes. Is KD an amazing player? Hell yes.

Just don't tell me this team without him can't contend...and certainly don't tell me that you know what would have happened last year or the year before with another player or players in place of KD.

Because...not too long ago...not many would have given the Warriors sans KD a chance against the Rockets. Lillard was better than Steph...etc.

I just don't get what is so hard in admitting that with KD...the Warriors are nearly unbeatable unless they play like shit. Without him...they are still contenders, but could lose to a number of the best teams in a playoff series. What is so hard?

[QUOTE=34-24 Footwork]Do the Warriors beat the bucks or raptors without KD? Yes or no? Are Steph, Klay, and Dray enough? Do they have anyone to make Kawhi or Giannis work defensively?

And what do you mean by "it doesn't matter if the Blazers come back"? You insinuating that if the Blazers beat the Warriors, it won't be because they didn't have KD?[/QUOTE]

Thats irrelevant to his point.

The fact that they are 2nd best at worst if they DO LOSE the finals without Durant, shows just enough how good they are.

[QUOTE=NBAGOAT]how the warriors do next year if kd leaves could answer a lot of questions. Yea they might sign more bench guys or a free agent sf but it'll be a good evidence of kd's impact(unless one of the big 3 really declines or they get another star somehow).

They're not going be 2016 level since lot of role guys are older and they're depth is worse. That team legitimately looked like a solid playoff team that could win 50+ without curry and was beating some other playoff teams easily(then again that still means curry was worth like 20+wins which is huge). I think 55 wins is a good over/under number.[/QUOTE]

Not retroactively.

The Warriors already have answered all the relevant questions for this 5 year stretch.

They won 67, a title, 73, within a couple plays of another...then over the last 3 years...have dominated with Steph and without KD.

We all know what they've been these last 5 years. Curry haters and KD stans just can't bring themselves to admit it.

If something changes next year...then it changes next year. It won't change how good these guys have been from 15 to present though.

Like I said alongtime ago... They wouldve been better with prime bogut and anybody that can do better than Harrison "15%" Barnes. Bogut enhanced their big man passing & screen game even more, and was the best rim,protector in the league. Perfect fit.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Not retroactively.

The Warriors already have answered all the relevant questions for this 5 year stretch.

They won 67, a title, 73, within a couple plays of another...then over the last 3 years...have dominated with Steph and without KD.

We all know what they've been these last 5 years. Curry haters and KD stans just can't bring themselves to admit it.

If something changes next year...then it changes next year. It won't change how good these guys have been from 15 to present though.[/QUOTE]

it wont change anything retroactively but it'll be easily the biggest amount of data we'll get so could affect our conclusions. The record is ridiculous without kd but I like to see some wowy numbers(which account for opponent srs etc). However tbf kd's never been the most impactful guy in the league based on some plus/minus stuff. Like westbrook I think was doing better in 16.

[QUOTE=NBAGOAT]it wont change anything retroactively but it'll be easily the biggest amount of data we'll get so could affect our conclusions. The record is ridiculous without kd but I like to see some wowy numbers(which account for opponent srs etc). However tbf kd's never been the most impactful guy in the league based on some plus/minus stuff. Like westbrook I think was doing better in 16.[/QUOTE]

Nah, the biggest amount of data is what we already have. We have 15 and 16 without KD...average of 70 wins...one title, and almost another...

Then we have them winning the last 2 titles...with KD...and now an unreal good record without KD in what is getting to a pretty large sample by itself...and has some playoff games now as well.

Data is in.

This team is a title contending team without KD...an all-time great team with KD that is nearly unbeatable...and probably close to unbeatable with 2 really good rotation players instead of KD if they had gone that route.

Something happening next year is close to irrelevant in my view...especially as the players are now aging in a way that sees a drop off.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Because not one person is arguing that they are better without him. That is why.

And, the Warriors pre-KD...there wasn't a gaping hole in the middle of the team like there is now without him. They had Barnes...and were always going to improve that spot.

It wasn't KD or nothing.

Your post is exactly what I'm talking about. A team going 29-1 without Durant and potentially making the finals...apparently doesn't matter. Like...what?

And we are supposed to give Durant a bunch of credit for winning titles on a team that is about as good as anyone else in the league without him? And already proved they could win a title and set the wins record with Harrison Barnes instead of him??????

I just...I can't believe that we have to explain this shit to people. Its all happened less than 5 years ago. It is happening right now...people need to stop pretending that Klay/Curry/Green/Iggy isn't probably the best top 4 in the league. Yes, they lack depth, but it is still an elite roster capable of beating any team...and they continue to prove it night in night out with KD.

Again...how are we having this debate when a team is ****ing 29-1 without KD? It is over for KD stans...they lost. Doesn't matter if the Blazers come back...etc. No team should be capable of losing their "best player" and going 29-1...and win big road playoff elimination games as well.

It was stupid and unfair when KD joined...and nothing has changed. Despite what he and his moronic fan base claim.[/QUOTE]

If LeBron gets credit for his 3 titles playing with two other prime all-stars, so does Durant. Let's be consistent.

[QUOTE=BallsOut]If LeBron gets credit for his 3 titles playing with two other prime all-stars, so does Durant. Let's be consistent.[/QUOTE]
he's lebron stan kobe/kd hater

[QUOTE=BallsOut]If LeBron gets credit for his 3 titles playing with two other prime all-stars, so does Durant. Let's be consistent.[/QUOTE]

I'm not going to rehash the Miami vs GS thing...

All I'll say is that both were bitch moves, but KD joining the Warriors was a total different ballgame.

And I don't really even care about that....I'm simply addressing the KD "carrying" narrative.

I'll just keep posting this;

29-1 without KD and with Steph in the last 30 games. Someone please address that.